Get you Sony OLED TV

[bendixG15]

Sony web site selling 11 inch OLED TVs for $2500 with expected shipping 10/13/2008.
-Contrast ratio is a million to one
-10 bit panel
-No backlight
-960 by 540 display resolution
-low energy consuption
-brilliant picture

Details here ...... http://www.sonystyle.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?catalogId=10&storeId...52921665327724

[redwudz]

Everything is very interesting except the 11" diagonal size and the price. But the idea is great. When they get them to a 42" diagonal or larger size and a bit better price, should be very nice.

[budz]

They'll be showcasing the OLED TV at next month's Sony Hawaii Expo.
I with redwudz when they have larger sets with better prices it'll be ideal!

[Soopafresh]

11" ? Better buy 2 - one for each eye.

[DVD_NDN]

I wonder... what IS the energy consumption?

What is that, relative to a 'more common' energy wise television. ("whats the difference, in terms of power consumption") - and then it makes me wonder... each area is different, for energy costs....
How long would it take for it to pay for itself?
How long would it take for 'the savings' in the cost for the energy, to amount to the cost of the OLED television?

Clearly we all agree... too small, too expensive... anyone a math person? care to suggest approximate times (for the product to pay for itself, in the savings)?

[budz]

11" ? Better buy 2 - one for each eye.

LmFAo!

[jg0001]

The one I saw in a Sony Style store was not overall that impressive for the cost.

Yes, the screen was bright and vibrant and skinny...
but, the screen is too damn small...
but, the FOOTPRINT is too damn large (for a screen so small)...
but, the AUDIO was incredibly weak -- and I mean even at 80% volume, you could barely hear it and what you did hear sounded like it was coming from a 1970s television, not a state of the art display

My advice? Skip it.

[jagabo]

How long would it take for it to pay for itself?

Let's compare it to a 19" HDTV which costs about $400 and consumes about 50 watts. We don't know how much power the Sony OLED consumes but's let's go to the extreme and say the $2400 TV consumes no power at all. So, at 50 watts how long will it take to add up to the $2000 difference in cost?

The price of electricity varies and we don't know how much it will cost in the future but let's use 20 cents per kilowatt hour. That's higher than almost everybody pays now. Let's say you run the TV 24 hours a day. 50 watts for 24 hours is 1.2 kilowatt hours (.05 * 24) per day. So it costs 24 cents (20 * 1.2) a day to run the 19" LCD. It will take 8333 days (2000 / .24) for the 19" LCD to consume $2000 worth of electricity. That's nearly 23 years.

In reality an 11 inch LCD would cost less than $400, the OLED will consume some energy, and the TV won't be on 24 hours a day. So you're probably looking at 100 years to break even.

[raffie]

Well, I'm looking forward to laptops in a couple of years. Concider a laptop with OLED display, SSD disk, and prolly better batteries than the ones we have now (Ive read about some kind of breakthrough on battery technology?). The things are gonna run all day on a battery

[MJA]

This TV been out months ago.nothing new
http://www.crutchfield.com/app/product/item/main.aspx?i=158OLEDXE1&search=oled


what about the laser DLP?

[Delta2]

I think they didn't solved yet the big lifespan problem of the colors in the OLED, manly the short life span of solid state blue...

And it is terribly sensible to humidity and oxygen exposures

Typically a LCD screen is 50,000-hours +/-

That screen was claimed by sony to have 30.000-hours, but I have read somewhere that that was false, it was only 11.000-hours

And we have another problem, I think companies should pay a fee or a license to commercialize OLED, because the owner of this patent/technology is Kodak and I don't believe that it will renounce to that

[orsetto]

I've seen this set in NYC stores and have to admit the image quality is stunning: I much prefer it to standard LCD, although we won't have a true comparison until they can make a much larger size. Other than Sony just grandstanding for the hell of it, though, I really don't see the point of them marketing this particular TV at all. Who the hell would buy it? Even if you're filthy rich, $2500 for an 11" television is ridiculous. Where would you use it? The kitchen? The bathroom? Again, even if you're loaded, a $2500 set is beyond overkill at this screen size. There isn't enough "wow, look what I have" cachet to this thing for a rich fool to blow $2500 on. It looks like a nice clock radio.

[Gramps]

We LOVE the immersive experience of our new 11" Sony OLED TV!!! With its deep blacks, high contrast, vibrant colors, and sharp detail, it feels like you are really there. We watched Finding Nemo last night on it and we could have sworn we were actually at the reef!!

[turk690]

Any new technology will always be expensive. LCD TVs and monitors are now commonplace & relatively cheap compared to what it was even just 10yrs ago. If I remember I read one manufacturer saying an LCD monitor bigger than 20" is not possible. Plasma initially held so much promise, but its power-guzzling reputation (in some cases, I got you) may haved pointed the direction to further LCD research, which we are all thankful for.
OLED is one way to go for a future monitor technology: no backlight, high contrast, fast response, low power consumption, etc. Granted there are lots of issues with the technology right now (like shorter blue life, compared with red & green); let's nonetheless check our facile comments at the door and return to them after, say, five years, where I believe OLED sets will come on their own in all respects.

[Wile_E]

Isn't LCD energy consumption low enough? They claimed way back years ago, how LCD would revolutionize the TV industry, in low power usage and flat displays. Today I guess that is not good enough??? I'd like to see the wattage rating on a working 50" OLED. Can't be that much lower than an LCD of the same size.

[SCDVD]

For those interested, here is a description of OLED and its history and applications http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organic_light-emitting_diode

[turk690]

to Wile_E, No power consumption level will be low enough. If a way can be found to lower power consumption of a technology with the same performance level, then that's where it will go.
LCDs themselves consume little power. But since LCDs do not produce light, being mere light shutters (unlike CRT or plasma phosphors & LEDs of all variety), they require a backlight. In typical situations of LCD monitors ranging from 17" to 40" out of the total power consumption of the monitor, the fluorescent lamp backlights consume from 50% to 80%. In a particular example, I tested an Acer AL1717 which was drawing about 3.3A total from its 12V brick. Inside the monitor this 12V branches out to power the LCD electronics itself & the backlight, so it's easy to measure the latter's consumption which was around 2.6A, or 78% of the total. It's not like as it was with the thousand-watt power-hungry CRTs & plasmas, but in these days of global warming ersatz, every green bit helps.
That's why although LCDs already consume less power per square inch than their CRT/plasma counterparts, REMOVING that backlight will even be better. This is where OLEDs should triumph.
In the past two years, there has been a move to make LEDs a source for general lighting (Luxeon/Philips & Cree for example) aside from being mere panel indicators, and to this end some LCD monitors already have LED backlights, NOT fluorescent tubes. While we're waiting for OLEDs to come on their own, LED backlit LCD monitors seem like a good compromise.

[redwudz]

I'm using LED night lights and they work very well. For general lighting, they are available, but a bit pricey at present. I do use compact fluorescents whenever possible.

I wondering how much difference low power consumption LCDs make when many of us are buying 500W+ power supplies to feed power hungry PCs.

Nevertheless, the Sony OLED seems a step in the right direction. Should be especially appealing for laptops, even in small sizes.

[RabidDog]

Many suitable uses i.e in seat backs for Hi-end cars, or hi-end jets. I have ordered 10 orf these to be fitted in my personal 787, (I am damn angry that boing are taking so long to deliver). Also medical imaging, where you dont want the doctor to miss a small cancerous lump (hello MCain) because the LCD they is using has a contrast ratio of 3000:1

[ron spencer]

787 ???

that is so yesterdays aircraft!!! Gag me

[DereX888]

who cares... its a S*ny, the overpriced junk company

1:1000000 contrast is great achievement. Finally we can watch movies on those (because so far no LCD have any black color LOL and people don't even notice it - I guess years of badly adjusted, oversaturated and with misadjusted hue CRT TVs took their toll on public's expectations for *quality* of picture...)


/edit/
wow:

We LOVE the immersive experience of our new 11" Sony OLED TV!!! With its deep blacks, high contrast, vibrant colors, and sharp detail, it feels like you are really there. We watched Finding Nemo last night on it and we could have sworn we were actually at the reef!!

right... an 11' reef...
Ease on Prozac, man!

[SatStorm]

I just talked with someone at Sony and he said that OLED screens gonna be a hit with small laptops, those called netbooks. In 5 years from now, they gonna be mainstream.
He also told me, that the price gonna drop sooner than expected.

Personally, I don't really believe that 5 years are enough time to turn OLED to something mainstream, but I can see that this technology sure has a future.